Comments on: Would It Help Things If the Prop 8 Judge Was Gay?

By: RW in LGB

RW in LGB — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:25:44 +0000

@gracevgray: You bigot, you’re too stupid for words. Let’s vote to take away YOUR civil rights, shall we?

The US Constitution is supposed to protect the civil rights of minorities from the likes of idiot cunts like you in the “majority”. Would that there were an intelligence test to be able to vote in the US. You would definitely know what it’s like to be a second-class citizen. Stupid twat.

By: gracevgray

gracevgray — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:21:05 +0000

we do not want gay marriage we voted, we spoke we do not want two men or two woman as parents, god has sent enough judgement as it is.

By: keith

keith — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 22:01:53 +0000

HE’S GAY! It’s pretty well known around SF that he is gay. But, don’t count on that swaying his decisions or rulings. He may be gay, but that won’t affect his decisions.

By: Flex

Flex — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 02:20:08 +0000

Will a gay justice help our cause? Absolutely not! It is rumored that justice Corrigan, on the California Supreme Court is a lesbian, she was outed in L.A. I can’t confirm my source either. But, we all know how she ruled in the marriage cases, in May 2008.

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:21:42 +0000

I don’t know where this author got the idea that some judge other than Walker will handle the trial. That is not true. Walker will handle all aspects of the case, including the trial, until it goes up on appeal.

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 06:09:19 +0000

I actually interned in Walker’s chambers. I didn’t pick up on any overtly gay signals (I’m gay myself), but a friend of mine who later worked for him was adamant that he was gay. Neither of us worked up the nerve to ask him directly. He came across as fairly conservative. He was also a Reagan appointee, and before becoming a judge he represented the US Olympic Committee in a trademark suit against the Gay Olympics. So anyone thinking the outcome of the Prop 8 suit is preordained is off by a long shot.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:13:51 +0000

“Will take place in a court room that doesn’t belong to Walker”

That says it right there. If he’s not making the ruling for it, then this whole article is moot for the judge’s bias…

By: M Shane

M Shane — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:53:33 +0000

Queerty, you are almost right about some matters of jurisprudence; in that to a degree, on matters that are really clearcut thereis not but one way to go. That is frequently not the case however, judges do “make ” law by interpretation, by what they decide is the spirit of a law and how it relates to other decisions etc. There is room for subjectivity. You are downright wrong about the last point. There could be several reasons for his moving the issue outside of his court; possibly just percieved bias one way or another if he is gay. If he is gay he may well not believe in marriage, possibly civil unions;; a lot of gay people don’t believe in marriage on principle.

His having it taken care of now mopst likely has to do with not making people hold their breaths for long because the bill is so clearly unbeatable.

By: Cam

Cam — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:22:35 +0000

It’s no different than a woman judge deciding an abortion case or a male judge deciding on a child support case. It just means the judge has more insight into being gay. Hopefully he’ll make the right decision, but sometimes people are so eagar to prove that they AREN’T biased that they end up going overboard the other way. Keep your fingers crossed!